Over the past decade a number of airports have experimented with wrapping luggage in a transparent polymer plastic wrap. When first introduced, this practice was considered to provide a number of advantages. It provided a measure of protection against unauthorized tampering with the luggage. It protected the luggage from scrapes and abrasions during handling. It protected the luggage from water damage from rain or snow encountered during handling.
Two types of luggage wrap are used; a thin ply, cling type of wrap and a heavier ply shrink wrap. The heavier ply shrink wrap has proven to be more effective. It provides a greater measure of protection and a greater degree of tamper resistance. A number of machines for automatically applying protective shrink wrapping have been developed and are described in the patent literature. Each machine has a particular advantage for which patent protection was sought and obtained. U.S. Pat. No. 3,815,313 which issued to Heisler in 1974 discloses a method and apparatus for heat shrinking a film around a piece of luggage and at the same time providing an integrally attached handle to assist with handling. U.S. Pat. No. 4,783,950 which issued to Santagati in 1988 discloses a method and apparatus for detecting the dimensions of a piece of luggage moving along a conveyor toward the heat shrinking equipment and adjust heat sealing rods to accommodate the dimensions with a minimum of wastage. U.S. Pat. No. 5,299,406 which issued to Laury in 1994 discloses an apparatus for shrink wrapping a piece of luggage which leaves an opening to provide access to the luggage handle.
Through experience it has been determined that the wrapping of luggage did not provide the degree of security that was originally envisaged. The criminal element proved capable of keeping up with advances in technology and, when it suited their purpose, resealing the luggage to cover their activities.